Do not decide MI by formally assessing current severity, and then comparing current
severity to the prior assessment made by the CPD adjudicator. To evaluate MI, the
adjudicator must carefully evaluate signs, symptoms, and laboratory findings to determine
whether MI has occurred, as discussed in DI 28010.001A. For additional information on substitution of judgment, see DI 28005.007.
Do not substitute judgment based on the prior adjudicator or medical consultant or
psychological consultant’s (MC/PC) assessment to find MI by formally assessing current
severity, and then comparing current severity to the prior assessment made by the
CPD adjudicator. For example, a MC at the time of a CDR feels the individual was capable
of standing and walking six-hours as opposed to the CPD MC’s rating of standing and
walking four-hours. If the signs, symptoms and laboratory findings present at the
CPD were discussed and evaluated appropriately, the current MC must not substitute
their judgment for the supported evaluation and rationale completed by the MC at the
CPD.
To appropriately assess MI, we look carefully at findings (signs, symptoms, or laboratory
findings) that were used to support the medical assessments (SSA-416, residual functional
capacity (RFC), psychiatric review technique (PRT), mental residual functional capacity
(MRFC), SSA-538, etc.) at CPD to see if there are any changes to those signs, symptoms
or laboratory findings. The RFC and other aforementioned assessments provide administrative
medical findings of fact. This is not to be confused with the medical findings in
the evidence, such as signs and laboratory findings.